Revamping the Warranting Rules

[Eol]

Clan mobs are always going to attack wanted individuals. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. This game already suffered from piss-poor-RP murderer criminals going city to city trying to stay ahead of warrants to get free and easy kills. Now we're suffering it again.

[Protus]

I think the warrant system is fine how it is.
I think mob auto attack on wanted is needed.
I think Banishments should be no longer then 1 irl week. If its bad enough for over a week it should be a warrant.

I wish there was a way to monitor alt warranting but I am not sure there is without major imm intervention which we all agree we dont want.
I think, like a few people have said, 99% of the warrants come and go without a hitch. I dont think we need to change anything for the 1%.

[pial]

I think there's a problem with general laziness and indifference when it comes to looking at pardons as well.

I also think people like to give warrants and then get mad if the person they warranted then fights back.

[Shamara]

I think a benefit of banishment is that it can give players time to cool off and de-escalate situations and it's nice as a warning versus just jumping right to warranting someone.

I think the warranting rules are fine but I like standardized punishments along with notes on process, e.g., record for the clan to see the pardon quest details, what mob the items were turned in at, when, etc. so that imms can later verify if needed (and to avoid people conveniently 'forgetting' such details when under investigation for abusing their power to pardon.

Standardized punishments might also:
1. Ensure more fairness/justice (e.g., one person in a clan might be known for just taking someone's head and another giving a harsh quest for the same crime)
2. It helps new people learn what to expect both those who are pardoning and those who commit crimes
3. It can offer more flexibility for people to play certain types of characters -- they may choose some crimes with punishments they don't mind for certain roleplay/gameplay.

One question is would standardized punishments be created by each clan or game wide? I would think each clan would have their own RP and treat crimes differently.

As a note, players can and do investigate bad pardons. On one alt, I investigated two people in a clan charged with doing two ooc pardons for a friend who was a suspected darkfriend (part of why the pardoning twice stood out). It resulted in both people losing enough qps so they were both demoted to the point where they could no longer issue pardons as my Watcher agreed that that ooc pardons can certainly have IC repercussions including investigating THEM as potential darkfriends for pardoning one.

Just because I and others try to protect people's privacy and don't publicize such information, it doesn't mean people aren't caught and punished by council.

[Benito]

Voting on warrants before they get placed would be nice. Removing mob auto attack from clan mobs would be nice, just have them assist the clan member etc. Punish OOC nonsense severely would be nice. I think banishments don't even make sense other than if it's for a day or something to give people space to make a decision. Other wise they just seem to be a loophole around warranting rules.

A pattern has certainly emerged: that being people who have the power to warrant in fairly strategic parts of the map don't find a problem with the power they've been given or how it is used.

To put together the logic of these posts: warrants should be difficult and time-consuming to issue, and as meaningless as possible when issuing is successful. It's not difficult to see who benefits from this arrangement. It's not the clans, and it's not the player-base in general. See Eol's post for further details.

I also think people like to give warrants and then get mad if the person they warranted then fights back.

As I said in the locked thread, in the part of my post that wasn't deleted, it's a joke to act like anyone enjoys giving out warrants, and it's a joke to act like most warrants are issued in the heat of the moment rather than as a last resort, or in response to a long string of events--at least this is speaking from the last 6 or so years I've been on the Lancer council.

[pial]

Doesn't benefit me bud, I'm going to get pardoned! I don't want to be warranted. I'll mail you with two warrants in recent memory from your clan that certainly do not fall under either a last resort or in a long string of events.

[Ibzon]

While I believe the warranting system could be improved, I don't think it's an important issue in the grand scheme of the mud and I believe, as others have stated, that the vast majority of warrants are non-issues.

It's hard not to make this personal about Pial because the issue IS personal. This issue is coming up here primarily because of one player. If this becomes a issue that affects more people, then it would be an issue that I think might deserve more attention. As it is, I don't think it's advantageous for us to expend major effort to help a person avoid the in game consequences of their actions, whoever that one individual might be.

Put another way, good cases make bad law.

[sati]

I know I'm new to this, but would like to offer my perspective anyway. The problem isn't with warrants, it is with the use of banishments to circumvent warranting rules. There are many cases where I've seen this happen. When a player cannot warrant someone due to the rules that are in place, they banish them instead. When asked for a time period for the banishment, they're told indefinitely. Then, when a player goes there, thinking it's unfair, they get warranted for breaking banishment. Oila! They now got to serve a warrant for a reason that does not adhere to the warranting rules.

Some say banishments are good because they allow cooler heads to prevail, but that's not how I've seen them used. I've seen banishments given through narrates to someone halfway across the land for something that did not even occur in their nation. How does that allow cooler heads to prevail? The last two times I've witnessed banishments, there was no realistic timeline set for the banishment. I feel that banishment is currently being used as a way to find loopholes around warranting rules.

[Adael]

1. You can warrant for any attack on your person anywhere in the mud, provided this doesn't breach any of the following rules.
2. You can warrant for any breaking of your nation's laws, provided these are in line with these rules.
3. You can warrant for witnessing a warrant being served on your clan's territory, provided this does not entail a wanted clanmate being hunted (this is in line with 4).
4. You cannot warrant for a player serving a warrant upon you.
5. You cannot warrant for a player assisting a fellow member of their clan when you are trying to serve a warrant upon the wanted.
6. You cannot warrant for clan affiliation or abilities, except for men who can channel.
7. If someone appeals a warrant you must a) post to the entire clan not to hunt that person due to an appeal and b) resolve it within seven (7) days or c) the clan Watcher will make the final binding ruling.
8. If someone submits and you accept the submission, you must pardon.

Bolded what I think is the relevant part. If a nation has a law that players may be banished for certain things, and breaking banishment incurs a warrant as part of the law, then I think it's probably legal.

Speaking for Andor, this happens to be the case. An example from part of our laws:

7. The Lion Warden reserves the right to order _anyone_ in Andor to remove their cloak and/or gloves/gauntlets to check for contraband. We also reserve the right to order you to remove your pack and give it to us, once again to check for contraband. If you do not comply, you will be banished from Andor. The time of the banishment is up to the Lion Warden on duty. Higher ranking Lion Wardens have the right to overrule any lower ranking Lion Wardens.

[Paj]

Then, when a player goes there, thinking it's unfair, they get warranted for breaking banishment.

Or that player could just follow the guidance, not break banishment, and PM the council on the issue of banishment. If a player is being carefree with handing out banishments and following them up with warrants (because for whatever reason a player thinks they should break banishment) then they are being corrupt and you use it against them.

Why a player would break a banishment is a source of issue too, they're just trying to cause more trouble than what caused them to get banished in the first place. What are they going to accomplish by breaking banishment in person that they couldn't deal with over tells, narrates, or in another city?

It's a simple system with checks and balances without the need for immortal intervention.